Care to share?
TL:DR, word on the street is that Black Lives Matter, the organization, is less concerned with Black Lives Matter, the message, and more concerned with your money.
I don’t want to speak for SlackerInc, but from what I’ve been reading around the internet (though never actually looked into it myself), BLM, the organization, has some very strong political ties with a lot of the money they receive as donations being funneled to the DNC via a non-profit called ActBlue.
I can’t speak to whether that’s true or not but it gives people a lot of ammo. They use this fact (“fact”?) to suggest that BLM has nothing to do with social justice and is simply something the DNC created to get your money. Even if that’s true, intentionally conflating the org with the message is a tactic people opposed to the message use to discredit it.
It would be like if the GOP started spreading messages that Keep Abortion Legal wasn’t created by a group that cared about women’s rights and that it was really just a democrat invention to separate college kids from their money. Or suggestion that no one should donate money to breast cancer research because of the Susan Komen mess.
Another reason to not watch NBA
Their raison d’etre, and for years their central rallying figure, was Mike Brown in Ferguson MIssouri. The Eric Holder Justice Department clearly demonstrated that this shooting was essentially suicide-by-cop. Yet BLM has never acknowledged this, and it fundamentally discredits them.
They engaged in disruptive bullying tactics in the 2016 election. I was livid at their disruption of Hillary Clinton’s event; and the one time I can ever remember being really sympathetic to Bernie Sanders is when they did the same to him.
No one has ever acknowledged this, including the Justice Dept. In fact, you’re the only one ive ever heard say this. Care to elaborate?
mc
@Joey_P BLM’s lack of financial transparency is somewhat troubling, but not uncommon with groups like this, and (as you say) not necessarily indicative of bad actions.
mc
People hardly ever talk about it, including in the news media, but the Justice Dept. absolutely came to this conclusion. It’s striking how many people, as you illustrate, don’t know this.
As detailed throughout this report, the evidence does not establish that the shots fired by
Wilson were objectively unreasonable under federal law. The physical evidence establishes that
Wilson shot Brown once in the hand, at close range, while Wilson sat in his police SUV,
struggling with Brown for control of Wilson’s gun. Wilson then shot Brown several more times
from a distance of at least two feet after Brown ran away from Wilson and then turned and faced
him. There are no witness accounts that federal prosecutors, and likewise a jury, would credit to
support the conclusion that Wilson fired at Brown from behind.[…]Were the government to prosecute Wilson, the court would instruct the jury using Loch
as a foundation. Given the evidence in this matter, jurors would likely conclude that Wilson had
reason to be concerned that Brown was a threat to him as he continued to advance, just as did the
officer in Loch.
In addition, even assuming that Wilson definitively knew that Brown was not armed, Wilson was
aware that Brown had already assaulted him once and attempted to gain control of his gun.
Wilson could thus present evidence that he reasonably feared that, if left unimpeded, Brown
would again assault Wilson, again attempt to overpower him, and again attempt to take his gun.
Under the law, Wilson has a strong argument that he was justified in firing his weapon at Brown
as he continued to advance toward him and refuse commands to stop, and the law does not
require Wilson to wait until Brown was close enough to physically assault Wilson. Even if, with
hindsight, Wilson could have done something other than shoot Brown, the Fourth Amendment
does not second-guess a law enforcement officer’s decision on how to respond to an advancing
threat. The law gives great deference to officers for their necessarily split-second judgments,
especially in incidents such as this one that unfold over a span of less than two minutes.[…]For all of the reasons stated, Wilson’s conduct in shooting Brown as he advanced on
Wilson, and until he fell to the ground, was not objectively unreasonable and thus not a violation
of 18 U.S.C. § 242.
ETA: Holder’s investigators also found, unrelated to the shooting itself, that the Ferguson police department engaged in a lot of petty harassment of African American members of the community. This was the finding that got all the press, while the exoneration of Wilson was extremely downplayed (as evidenced by how few people are aware of it). Really unfair to Wilson.
I can speak to whether this is true - it’s not.
On the other hand, I’ve been told by liberals that the organization, “Black Lives Matter”, is just some group that grabbed the name, and not an organization one should support. I haven’t researched this in depth, as there’s not shortage of groups that ARE worthy of support.
Just going to say, I have no idea what that particular org called Black Lives Matter does or whether it’s a worthwhile use of your money to advance the overall cause - just that it isn’t an evil scheme to give money to the democrats.
The funny thing, IMO, is that even if they did give all their money to the DNC…would that be that bad. Yes, I understand that people want to believe that their donations are going directly and entirely to helping black lives. But it seems that if the Right convinces said black lives that the money is going to the DNC I wouldn’t think they’d stop donating. I imagine the vast majority of people that donate (or receive) from BLM would prefer a democrat president.
If people wanted to get people to stop donating, it would have made more sense to convince them that all the money was given to Jeff Bezos or Peta or Walmart or something that they’d actually be against.
And, in any case, since the vast majority of people that promote BLM aren’t actually giving money, the message still stands. Just like how people still promote breast cancer awareness even though The Susan Komen Foundation wasn’t exactly doing what they suggested they were doing with all that money.
Yes, I’ve read the report. It says Wilson’s actions were justified.
But, you said they came to the conclusion that Brown suicided by cop. Quite the accusation, so far with no support.
Maybe this hijack should have it’s own thread.
But back to the topic at hand…
If a player had Black Lives Matter on their jersey, why assume that they meant the org over the sentiment since you’ve said that you’re cool with that?
Lol, “no support”. Charging a cop who has a gun pointed at you, and continuing to advance on him after he tells you to stop? Unless we require actual telepathy to diagnose suicide by cop, I don’t know what else you need. Unless you’re just saying that Mike Brown is the stupidest person imaginable.
ETA: I was going to say that I would love it if BLM contributions went straight to the DNC, as I am one of the few people you will encounter online who strongly supports the DNC rather than other splinter progressive groups who tend to attack the mainstream of the party. But upon further consideration, I would only want them to have that money if it were untraceable, because otherwise the DNC then has to own everything associated with BLM.
Wow…
Do you feel Ahmaud Arbery committed suicide when he charged a man with a gun who had repeatedly told to him to stop?
What you see as a suicide, I see as a desperate attempt to save his own life against a man he was convinced was trying to kill him (in both cases).
Is that also your explanation for why he reached into the squad car, punched Wilson, and tried to grab Wilson’s gun (still holstered at that time)? 
I suppose when he roughed up the guy at the store before grabbing those cigarillos, it was also out of fear?
Are you hijacking your own thread?
What is your opinion of the NBA rule, now that you know they can pick from a specific list? Does it soothe your fears that someone may choose Heil Hitler! or something?
I have not seen anyone link to a list. But I would be interested in seeing it if you would like to do so.
Sure, let me Google that for you. …searches for “list of NBA messages”…
Here’s the very first result: NBA Approves 29 Social Justice Statements For Player Jerseys
From there:
The reported list of approved social messages includes Black Lives Matter; Say Their Names; Vote; I Can’t Breathe; Justice; Peace; Equality; Freedom; Enough; Power to the People; Justice Now; Say Her Name; Sí Se Puede (Yes We Can); Liberation; See Us; Hear Us; Respect Us; Love Us; Listen; Listen to Us; Stand Up; Ally; Anti-Racist; I Am A Man; Speak Up; How Many More; Group Economics; Education Reform; and Mentor.
I’m not exactly sure why you couldn’t do that, since this topic seems to be important to you.
I did Google “group economics” as I had never heard of that before. If people are able to advocate for that economic theory, they should also be able to advocate for others.
I also object to having “education reform” without any option to make a case against reformers. That may sound esoteric to some, but actually one of the most important issues to me is to stand up against the reform movement symbolized by that bullshit Waiting for Superman movie.
If they took away those two options (or added a bunch of others), I wouldn’t really have a problem with it.
Is Group Economics the same as when a group of, say, Korean immigrants come together to help one open a grocery store, and help send each other to school, or open other businesses?
If that’s the case, I don’t understand why it’s objectionable at all – it seems to say that they should support black businesses and give each other a leg up.
“Education Reform” is so anodyne, I don’t see why you object to it – maybe it means giving out vouchers for private or religious schools? Maybe it means hiring the best teachers, regardless of seniority? Who the hell knows what it mean? You can assign whatever you want to it – “Our students have fallen behind other wealthy nations in various measurements. We need education reform!”